Jake Arrieta

The Phillies are “having dialogue” with Jake Arrieta and his representatives, according to Jon Heyman of Fan Rag (via Twitter). While there’s currently a “gap” between the sides’ bargaining positions, it seems there’s at least some real interest being explored.

Philadelphia has long been cited as a possible landing spot for Arrieta, but this is the firmest indication yet that they organization is really looking into the move. Of course, multiple recent reports have emphasized that the Phils don’t want to lock into a long-term deal to improve their rotation, and that motivation no doubt remains a major factor.

From Arrieta’s perspective, he’s now the top player left on the board (that is, MLBTR’s top 50 free agent list). Other Scott Boras clients are taking deals that feature front-loaded structures and opt-out opportunities, though that general approach may not quite meet with the Phillies’ interest. Perhaps there’s still some room for creativity in structuring a deal for Arrieta.

The obvious comp on this year’s market remains Yu Darvish, who landed $125MM from the Cubs — who reportedly at least checked in with Arrieta’s camp before finalizing things with Darvish. Other organizations no doubt share the Phillies’ interest in opportunism on the quality veteran starter — including, perhaps, the division-rival Nationals — so it’s still amply possible that interest from multiple quarters will push Arrieta into the nine-figure range.

The Cubs “put in one last call” to Jake Arrieta before completing their six-year, $126MM deal with Yu Darvish, reports Jon Heyman of FanRag Sports. Heyman says Epstein respectfully inquired as to whether Arrieta would have been willing to accept “a deal believed to be similar to the one offered to Darvish should Darvish turn them down.” According to Heyman, “while Arrieta surely appreciated the gesture, he wasn’t immediately prepared to accept a six-year deal for what was believed to be for a similar annual salary.”

A careful reading of Heyman’s phrasing is advised, as he at no point states that the Cubs actually made a six-year offer to Arrieta. Nor could one accurately say Arrieta turned down a six-year offer from the Cubs, as we erroneously did in an earlier version of this post. Last Wednesday, Bob Nightengale of USA Today reported that “the Cubs and Arrieta barely even engaged in contract talks this winter.” If that’s correct, it would be odd for Epstein to even have made an intimation of a six-year offer around that same time.

It isn’t uncommon for teams or their free agents to touch base with each other one final time before either side is on the verge of a move, either out of mutual respect and/or genuine interest to see if a deal could be reached. (For one example from this winter, Carlos Santana’s representatives kept the Indians up to date on his market just to leave open the possibility that the Tribe could’ve found the payroll space to keep Santana in Cleveland.) It also isn’t an uncommon tactic for a team to approach several similarly-valued free agents with similar contact offers to see which, if any, accepts first.

Certainly, it doesn’t seem that Arrieta or his agent Scott Boras felt the need to jump at the Cubs’ offer, as Boras is still confident his client will land a deal closer to the much higher price tag Boras was reportedly seeking earlier this offseason. While the lack of free agent activity around the sport is “not traditional,” Boras said, “it seems normal (now). The free agent market is now under way. For me, it’s December 10th, not February 10th.” Heyman gives an idea of Arrieta’s possible current asking price, writing, “Some might have seen the Cubs’ last-minute inquiry as a chance to end a difficult free-agent season happily, but others understood that Arrieta probably wasn’t going to take a much lower deal than Jon Lester’s in light of the fact that a strong case could be made he’s outperformed Lester over the last few years.” Heyman’s “case” for Arrieta as compared to Lester is certainly worth debating. Lester signed a six-year, $155MM deal with the Cubs on the eve of his 31st birthday, on the back of a huge walk year that resulted in a fourth-place Cy Young finish and a big market bidding war. Arrieta turns 32 soon and is coming off a good, but not great, year. He’s also battling a historically slow free agent market that is likely to leave at least a few big names disappointed.

Heyman lists the Brewers, Nationals, Phillies, Twins, and Cardinals as “the most logical teams” that could still make a play for Arrieta, though he notes that the latter two clubs seem like longer shots. Milwaukee, Washington, and Philadelphia have all been linked to Arrieta at various points this winter and, now that Darvish is off the board, Arrieta might be the top target for a Brewers team that has money to spend and a need for front-of-the-rotation pitching. The Phillies also have a glaring rotation need but may still be a year away from serious spending (their deal with Santana notwithstanding), while the Nats would have to carve out payroll space or simply accept a big luxury tax overage in order to sign Arrieta.

The Twins made the Rays a trade offer involving Chris Archer “as recently as two weeks ago,” La Valle E. Neal III of the Minneapolis Star Tribune reports. The two clubs have often been linked in rumors this winter as Minnesota explores seemingly all free agent and trade options for starting pitching, with Archer and fellow Ray Jake Odorizzi both drawing attention from the Twins. Earlier reports stated that the Rays had interest in Max Kepler, and Neal notes that Kepler would be likely be targeted “as part of any package for Archer.” Of course, it remains to be seen if the Twins or any team can meet the Rays’ enormous asking price for the controllable young ace; Archer said last month that he feels that he’ll still be pitching in Tampa Bay in the coming season.

Also from Neal’s piece, he lists several other free agent pitching options for the Twins, though Jake Arrieta doesn’t appear to be a likely candidate. “The Twins’ chances of signing Arrieta…are remote,” Neal writes. While Minnesota was willing to offer a five-year, $100MM+ deal to Yu Darvish, it doesn’t look like the club is willing to make such a splurge for Arrieta, and will instead look at less-expensive options.

With his career as a starting pitcher faltering in 2013, Zach Duke decided to embrace being a reliever after some blunt words from his wife Kristin, the newly-signed Twin tells Mike Berardino of the St. Paul Pioneer Press. “She kind of had to beat it through my head that I was done as a starter,” Duke said. “My wife just kind of said, ’Listen, nobody is interested in you as a starter anymore. They’ve seen it, babe. There’s nothing changing. They know what they’re going to get as a starter, and nobody wants it anymore.’ ” Kristin’s advice ended up turning her husband’s career around, particularly after a late-season run of success out of the Reds’ bullpen in 2013. Over the last four seasons, Duke has a 2.85 ERA, 2.62 K/BB rate and a 10.0 K/9 over 198 2/3 relief innings.

The Marlins could add a veteran outfielder within the next week or so, reports MLB.com’s Joe Frisaro, who names free agents Melky Cabrera, Jon Jay and Jose Bautista as possibilities (though Jay isn’t atop their list, Frisaro notes). Miami is indeed “exploring” signing someone to a major league contract, according to president Michael Hill. Doing so would put the Marlins over the 40-man roster limit, but they’re “prepared to” jettison a player if necessary, per Hill. Notably, all of Cabrera, Jay and Bautista either have ties to Marlins decision-makers or Florida. Cabrera played with Marlins part-owner Derek Jeter with the Yankees from 2006-09, and manager Don Mattingly was on New York’s coaching staff during a portion of that stretch. Jay is a Miami native, meanwhile, and Bautista resides in the state. Any of the three would immediately become the most established outfielder on a rebuilding Marlins team that has traded Giancarlo Stanton, Christian Yelich and Marcell Ozuna in separate deals this winter.

More from the NL:

While reports earlier this offseason painted the Brewers as aggressive Yu Darvish suitors, that wasn’t really the case, according to Tom Haudricourt of the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel. Darvish, who agreed to join the NL Central rival Cubs on Saturday, “was never going to wear a Brewers uniform,” Haudricourt writes. With Darvish off the board, starter-needy Milwaukee could perhaps turn its focus to former Cub Jake Arrieta – who’s now the top pitcher available – but Haudricourt suggests it’s unlikely he’ll end up a Brewer.

The right shoulder issues that Cardinals infielder Matt Carpenter played through last season are no longer hampering him, he tells Derrick Goold of the St. Louis Post-Dispatch. “It’s not in the back of mind, like it was, not at all,” he said. “It’s not limiting me in any way. I can go out and do whatever. It is as if everything is normal.” Carpenter’s shoulder made it a challenge for him to swing a bat in 2017, yet he still managed to amass 622 plate appearances and slash a terrific .241/.384/.451. Although, Carpenter’s production did drop off from 2015-16, a 1,231-PA run in which he batted .271/.372/.505.

Injuries have beset promising Mets starters Zack Wheeler and Steven Matz during their careers, but they’re both optimistic heading into the new season, Kevin Kernan of the New York Post details in a pair of articles. Wheeler missed all of 2015-16 after undergoing Tommy John surgery and then threw just 86 1/3 innings of 5.21 ERA ball in his return last year. His season ended in July on account of a stress reaction in his right arm, but he now “feels great.” Wheeler explained his recovery process to Kernan, saying: “It needed two full months of rest. I got that, and then I’ve been taking these shots every day for the past six months. The medicine is called Forteo and it is supposed to strengthen your bones, so hopefully that helps.” The left-handed Matz logged a mere 66 2/3 frames of 6.08 ERA pitching in 2017, which concluded for him in August when he underwent surgery to reposition the ulnar nerve in his elbow.“They moved the nerve over, they take it out of the groove and they sew it down, basically they moved it out of the way,” Matz said of the procedure. “I feel really good this season,” he added.

It took over three months, but the premier free agent in this year’s class finally came off the board Saturday. Right-hander Yu Darvish agreed to join the Cubs on a six-year, $126MM guarantee that includes an opt-out clause after 2019. As you’d expect, a bevy of media reactions to the agreement have come in over the course of the day. Here’s a look at several…

When the offseason began in November, Darvish “wasn’t really” on Chicago’s radar, Sahadev Sharma of The Athletic reports on Twitter. However, it seems the Cubs benefited from this winter’s slow-moving free-agent market in this case, as it helped lead to a lower-than-expected price tag for Darvish and a major splash for the North Siders. Darvish went into the winter seeking an accord along the lines of Stephen Strasburg’s (seven years, $175MM) or new teammate Jon Lester’s (six years, $155MM), Patrick Mooney of The Athletic details (subscription required).

While there’s a well-known fondness between Darvish and the Rangers, with whom he has spent the majority of his career, Texas was “not even close” to landing him, Jeff Wilson of the Fort Worth Star-Telegram hears. Evan Grant of the Dallas Morning News adds that Texas didn’t make an offer to Darvish, and the club wouldn’t even have been willing to guarantee him $75MM in total if it did. The Rangers have a glaring need for a front-end starter, but they’re not close enough to contention to splurge on one, Grant writes. Rangers general manager Jon Daniels, who has a good relationship with Darvish, spoke highly of the 31-year-old on Saturday. “I am very happy for Yu and hope he gets everything he wants,” Daniels said (via Wilson). “He will go down as one of the best pitchers in Rangers history. I expect he’s going to be very good wherever he goes.”

The Dodgers, Darvish’s other ex-team, made him an offer, but it fell short of the Cubs’, Ken Rosenthal of The Athletic (subscription required) and Bill Shaikin of the Los Angeles Times report. Contrarily, Jon Heyman of FanRag tweets that LA was “said to have offered in the same ballpark” as Chicago. Although, signing Darvish would have made it difficult for the Dodgers to achieve their goal of staying under the $197MM luxury tax threshold in 2018.

Likewise, tax concerns stood in the way of a Yankees-Darvish union. New York never even made Darvish an offer, Rosenthal tweets.

The small-market Twins aggressively went after Darvish this winter, even meeting with him in Texas at some point, per Mike Berardino of the Pioneer Press. Their offer to Darvish was for at least five years and $100MM, according to Heyman (Twitter link). The Twins’ courtship of Darvish went for naught, though, perhaps thanks to their dislike for opt-out clauses and a wariness toward giving him a sixth year, writes Berardino, who adds that they could now look to top available starter Jake Arrieta. On the trade front, Rays righties Chris Archer and Jake Odorizzi remain on Minnesota’s radar, relays Berardino, though he suggests the Twins would have to give up too much for the former. Meanwhile, Rosenthal reports that there’s a belief among rival executives the Twins could still add a starter via both free agency and the trade market. Along with Odorizzi, he lists free agent Alex Cobb and Astros righty Collin McHugh as hurlers who have drawn Minnesota’s interest.

The upstart Brewers were part of the Darvish derby, too, and the belief is that they also submitted a proposal of at least five years and $100MM, Heyman tweets. However, Rosenthal hears that Milwaukee’s offer “was not as competitive as reports indicated.” Further, Rosenthal suggests that the Brewers may have primarily been in the running just to drive up the price for the NL Central rival Cubs. Regardless, with Darvish now out of the mix, Odorizzi and the Athletics’ Jharel Cotton are trade possibilities for the Brew Crew, according to Rosenthal.

Keith Law of ESPN (subscription required) has mixed feelings on the Darvish pact. While it “appears to be a bargain salary,” Law has reservations about the length, contending that it’s one or two years too long, and he doesn’t regard Darvish “a pure ace.” Darvish has become too reliant on his cutter and not reliant enough on his slider, which has led to vulnerability against left-handed hitters, Law observes. However, Darvish may have “some untapped potential right now” if he leans more on his slider, per Law, who at least sees him as a significant near-term upgrade for the Cubs.

As sparring continues over the ongoing free agent freeze — see Boras v. Halem, Clark v. Manfred — Bob Nightengale of USA Today takes an interesting look at how he believes the market might shake out for the top available players. His overall analysis and predictions are well worth a look, but a few items of information bear highlighting as part of the market landscape.

Slugger J.D. Martinez was the focus of a skirmish yesterday in the war of words, with some sparring over the fact that the Red Sox have not upped their longstanding offer — which evidently still stands at a previously reported five-year, $125MM level. Per Nightengale, the only other offer on the table right now is from the Diamondbacks, but it’s just a one-year deal. Clearly, all involved have reason to anticipate that there’d be greater interest than that from other organizations, but it’s a notable point in relation to Martinez’s hopes for generating pressure on the Sox.

Notably, too, the Red Sox are perhaps still aware of other means of fulfilling their desire for right-handed power. Nightengale says the organization spoke with the Indians earlier in the offseason about a potential deal that would have brought Edwin Encarnacion to Boston. Whether or not there’s any plausible hope of reviving those discussions isn’t clear, though, and the Sox are said not to have been willing to send Jackie Bradley Jr. to Cleveland. Clearly, that’s no surprise, as Bradley is a much younger and more affordable player who still offers plenty of value to the Sox. Indeed, it’s amply arguable that Bradley is a more valuable overall performer than is Encarnacion.

Top free agent starter Yu Darvish is sitting on multiple five-year offers, per Nightengale. At the moment, he’s still hoping an organization will decide to give him an extra year — or, in a longer-shot scenario, that the Dodgers or Yankees will find a way to move other contracts to open the door to a Darvish signing. For the most part, this seems to represent a continuation of the status quo, as is the case for the other top starters.

As for Jake Arrieta, we have not heard a ton of public chatter. There isn’t much new, it seems, but Nightengale does suggest that one hypothetical possibility isn’t likely: the incumbent Cubs have “barely even engaged in contract talks” with their former staff ace, per the report. That is not very surprising, of course. The sides already know one another (and their respective bargaining positions) quite well. And it’s clear that, while a reunion has always remained hypothetically possible, both team and player intended to explore alternatives during the winter. Still, it’s notable that they have evidently not circled back around to one another to this point.

In his latest exploration of the stagnant free-agent market, Yahoo’s Jeff Passan reports that free agents have begun to discuss the possible organization of a training camp that would “mimic their typical spring work.” Pitchers and catchers are set to begin reporting for Spring Training in just three weeks, of course, and there are well over 100 unsigned players still seeking employment for the upcoming season.

While the five-year deal for Lorenzo Cain established a new high-water mark for free agents this winter both in terms of contract length and guaranteed money, Passan suggests that other top free agents aren’t necessarily expected to follow. Despite a recent report that Yu Darvish is expected to reach an agreement in the next few days, Passan hears differently, writing that teams throughout the league don’t think that any of Darvish, Jake Arrieta, Eric Hosmer or J.D. Martinez is close to signing. (Certainly, that can change in a hurry with an improved offer from even one potential suitor.)

More broadly, Passan again explores the lack of spending throughout the league in an offseason environment that has been increasingly governed by some teams’ strict adherence to avoiding luxury tax penalization. Prior to the latest wave of collective bargaining negotiations, Passan adds, the league was prepared for the luxury tax line to jump as high as $215MM and considered it a major victory when the bar was raised to $195MM last year and $197MM in 2018. (The tax threshold will increase to $206MM in 2019, $208MM in 2020 and $210MM in 2021.)

While the luxury tax only serves as a direct deterrent for Major League Baseball’s top spenders and thus cannot be viewed as some form of panacea to explain the woefully slow winter, it’s unquestionably slowed things at the top end of the market. Officials from both the Yankees and Dodgers acknowledged to Passan that they’d have spent more this offseason had the tax barrier been higher. And the Giants, of course, have openly stated on multiple occasions that they, too, are looking to reset their penalty level by narrowly staying under the tax line. It stands to reason that they could’ve been more involved in the outfield market with some extra breathing room in that regard.

Exactly how the remainder of the offseason plays out obviously can’t be known, but Passan indicates that players are continuing to encourage one another to hold firm and not cave into lesser deals in a sense of panic as Spring Training approaches.

At some point, it seems fair to wonder, too, if that sense of panic will hit teams that view themselves as hopeful contenders but have multiple glaring holes on the roster. The Orioles, for instance, have been seeking three starting pitchers as well as a left-handed-hitting outfielder but have yet to address any of those needs in a meaningful way. The Nationals still could use a fifth starter and an upgrade behind the plate. The Twins have made a trio of bullpen upgrades but still have clear rotation needs. Eventually, there will have to be a landslide of agreements, though that’s been the common refrain for weeks and there’s still little in the way of actual results.

Royals lefty Danny Duffy says he is throwing pain free after an offseason elbow clean-up, as MLB.com’s Jeffrey Flanagan reports. “Honestly, I had forgotten what it felt like to throw without any pain or discomfort,” says Duffy. That’s good news for Kansas City, as the organization will expect the southpaw to lead an uncertain staff in 2018 and beyond — unless, that is, he isn’t traded at some point. Other organizations would no doubt have interest in Duffy’s reasonable contract ($61MM through 2021), though we haven’t seen any indication that the Royals are likely to move the 29-year-old this winter.

Over at The Athletic, Patrick Mooney has a pair of articles (subscriptionlinks) regarding the market’s two top pitchers. The Cubs have plenty of money left to work with, he notes, and have seemingly remained engaged with Yu Darvish for much of the winter. That said, there are still alternatives for both team and player; Mooney says the Cubs have other scenarios in mind and notes the possibility of mystery teams in Darvish’s market. It’s less clear, Mooney suggests, that there’s a realistic path back to Chicago for Jake Arrieta. As MLBTR’s 2018 Free Agent Tracker shows, Darvish and Arrieta are just a few of the many starters still available; remarkably, the Cubs’ early agreement with Tyler Chatwood still paces this winter’s market for rotation contracts.

The Indians are readying for an arbitration hearing with righty Trevor Bauer, Paul Hoynes of the Plain Dealer writes. Cleveland is utilizing a file-and-trial approach, says Hoynes, meaning a panel will decide whether the righty plays for $5.3MM or $6.52MM in the coming season. The results won’t just determine whether Bauer can pick up an additional $1.22MM for the coming season; his 2018 salary will also set a base rate for raises in his final two seasons of arb eligibility. As always, you can keep track of all the arbitration developments with MLBTR’s 2018 Arbitration Tracker.

Despite Christian Yelich’s unhappiness with the Marlins’ direction and the recent comments from his agent to ESPN’s Jerry Crasnick indicating that the relationship between team and player is “irretrievably broken,” the Marlins maintain an understandably high asking price on the 26-year-old. MLB Network’s Peter Gammons uses the Braves as an example of that lofty asking price (video link), reporting that the Marlins at one point informed Atlanta that they’d be willing to talk about a multi-player package that would send Yelich to the Braves if and only if top prospect Ronald Acuna was the headliner of the deal. (Braves fans will undoubtedly scoff at the very notion, though it’s hardly a surprise to see the Marlins pushing for any team’s top-ranked prospect when peddling five years of Yelich at a maximum total of $58.25MM.)

Unsurprisingly, Gammons quickly adds, “That’s one guy the Braves are not going to trade,” in reference to Acuna. Despite the drama surrounding Yelich and teammate J.T. Realmuto, Gammons notes that the Marlins aren’t locks to deal the pair, with Yelich being especially difficult to pry away given the affordable half-decade of control he has on his contract.

More from the division…

At today’s press conference to reintroduce Jay Bruce, Mets general manager Sandy Alderson suggested to reporters that his team likely has the budget to make one more notable addition (link via Ken Davidoff of the New York Post). Alderson confirmed recent reports that his preference would be to sign a free agent rather than make a trade. “If we were to try to improve in that area, I think we prefer to sign a free agent, only because it doesn’t require us to give up talent,” the GM said. Alderson acknowledged a trade as a possibility, adding that while his farm isn’t as strong as it once was, the Mets do still have players that have drawn interest from other clubs. There have been suggestions that young outfielder Brandon Nimmo could be on the table if the Mets and Pirates discuss a Josh Harrison trade, though the Post’s Mike Puma tweeted today that the Mets “aren’t particularly enthusiastic” about the idea of trading Nimmo for Harrison.

Nick Williams has been working out alongside free agent Jake Arrieta for much of the offseason in Austin, he tells Jim Salisbury of NBC Sports Philadelphia, and the young outfielder has talked up Philadelphia in an effort to sell Arrieta on joining the Phillies. “He has told me he likes working with young guys,” said Williams. “I’m like, ‘All right, come on up.’ But I’m not writing the check. I don’t know what he wants. I don’t really dig into that because I’m not really in his position.” While Williams’ pitch to his workout buddy should hardly be characterized as a legitimate connection between the Phils and Arrieta, Salisbury notes that the team is still actively trying to add to the rotation. If the price tag for Arrieta or another top starter comes down to a shorter length — Salisbury suggests three years, though it’s tough to see Arrieta dropping to that point — the Phillies’ interest could be piqued.

Though much of the attention in Washington D.C. is placed on the fact that 2018 is Bryce Harper’s final year before free agency, USA Today’s Bob Nightengale points out that Nationals GM Mike Rizzo is also entering the last year of his deal. The two sides haven’t spoken about an extension yet, per Nightengale — owner Mark Lerner tells Nightengale a new deal will be discussed “in the normal course of business” — but Rizzo hopes to remain beyond the ’18 season. Rizzo is wrapping up a five-year, $10MM deal, per Nightengale, and the GM somewhat candidly suggested that he feels he’s earned a deal more commensurate with the top executives in the league. “I just think I deserve to be treated like some of the best GMs in the game are, too,” he said.

In his latest column, Jeff Passan of Yahoo Sports takes a lengthy, thought-provoking look at what has been a downright glacial free-agent market unlike any seen in MLB history. To date, no free agent has agreed to a contract guaranteeing more than three guaranteed seasons, and the vast majority of top-tier free agents remain unsigned with roughly a month to go until pitchers and catchers report for Spring Training.

If this sounds familiar, perhaps that’s because Passan tackled the general issue months back, when a slow-down was already apparent. Of course, the plot has thickened in many ways since, even as some free agents have signed in the interim. We took our own look at his arguments at the time, and will do so again here.

So, is there evidence of collusion? Is the luxury tax line effectively creating a salary cap of sorts? Are factors unique to the 2017-18 market really an explanation? What’s really at play here? In many ways, it’s all still uncertain, but Passan argues that the slow market primarily about broader structural changes that have redounded to the benefit of teams — particularly, perhaps, a system of player compensation that no longer aligns with the realities of the game.

Let’s start with the concept of collusion. Unsurprisingly, Major League Baseball issued a staunch denial of any such notion in a statement to Passan that interestingly targets one very notable agent (more on that further below):

“There are a variety of factors that could explain the operation of the market. We can say that without a doubt collusion is not one of them. It’s difficult to pinpoint a single cause, but it certainly is relevant that an agent who has a long track record of going late into the market controls many of the top players.”

Certainly, there’s no clear evidence of collusion that has been cited to this point. As Matthew Trueblood of Baseball Prospectus argues, there are a few questionable data points on the market, but still no definitive proof of price fixing — in large part because we don’t yet have the full context necessary for interpreting what has occurred to date. As Passan has explained previously, uniformity in team valuations can perhaps create a fairly consistent line in the sand at a certain number of years or dollars for a given free agent. Really, who’s to say whether that — standing alone — represents active collusion, some kind of passive collusion, or simply standardized analytical processes?

It isn’t as if we have yet observed bunches of players settling for contracts far below their market values. To the contrary, while years have been on the light side — no deals have gone past three guaranteed — the overall earnings have been as robust as MLBTR generally expected for those players that have signed to this point. While Addison Reed recently fell well shy of his predicted value (we don’t really yet know why), others, such as Tyler Chatwood and Tommy Hunter (to take but two examples), have received quite a lot more than expected.

As for the still-unsigned players, we just don’t know yet, and what little information we have seems inconclusive. Passan says that “one of the best free agents” feels the offers he has received are “so incompatible with his production” that he might wait until mid-season to sign. Without more information — who? how much? what would he deem fair and is that supportable? — that example really can’t even be assessed. An assistant GM tells Passan he’d rather pay Lorenzo Cain at a big rate ($24MM) for one season than promise him a longer-term deal. That’s an interesting and somewhat curious position, as Cain projects as a quality asset for a few years into the future, though it’s tough to assess without knowing the full context. More to the point, that view from one executive on one team hardly establishes the absence of a reasonable market for Cain.

Asking prices and expectations don’t always coincide with results in free agency. For every surprisingly large contract, there’s typically a supposed bargain. There was perhaps more talk than ever about lofty asking prices for free agents entering this offseason. Over the last several months, there have been reports of asking prices of $200MM or more for J.D. Martinez, Eric Hosmer, and even Jake Arrieta — rates that hardly seemed achievable at the outset of free agency. Players like Alex Cobb and Lance Lynn were both said (at some point, at least) to be seeking nine-figure commitments and/or $20MM annual salaries. We recently addressed just this subject with regard to Cobb, who never seemed likely to command that sort of deal and appears to be receiving some interest within range of what might reasonably have been anticipated entering the winter. Some have suggested that outfielder Jay Bruce was forced to settle for his three-year, $39MM deal, but that’s exactly the contract we predicted back in November.

Passan identifies ten teams that will or may sit out this free-agent period, suggesting that “players are panicking” in the face of the situation. But it isn’t exactly unusual for a variety of teams to forgo significant open-market spending in a given year — for instance, as of February 1, 2016, ten teams had spent $12.25MM or less — and few of the listed clubs seemed to be in position to go for broke in free agency before things got underway. Further, some of the organizations he lists (the White Sox, Tigers, and Athletics, for instance) have already spent at least some money on mid-level free agents. Others (the Royals and Padres) have reportedly offered nine-figure contracts that have helped establish the market for Hosmer. Still more (the Braves seem like a possibility) could still dangle multi-year deals in the right circumstances.

On the whole, while the market hasn’t yet produced nearly as many contracts as is typical at this point on the calendar, it seems premature to presume that this is the beginning of a lasting trend. There’s little question that this is a highly unusual market environment, but just how that’ll shake out simply cannot be known. Even if the result is a lesser overall outlay for the current crop of free agents, moreover, there’ll still be room for interpretation and ongoing developments regarding what it all means going forward. None of that is to say that all players or all agents are setting unrealistic starting points or targets — or that, in fact we aren’t about to see a massive shortfall in anticipated free agent spending. That could yet come to pass.

Even without the benefit of knowing how the market will line up, though, there’s plenty more to chew on here. Passan focuses particular ire on the concept that the new CBA’s luxury tax provisions have created a de facto spending cap. He argues that the actual penalties embodied in the CBA spending provisions aren’t that significant, calling the tax “a well-branded pretext for teams not to spend.”

The point is well-taken, on the one hand: it serves as a comfortable reference point when teams need to explain why they’re suddenly clamming up. For many organizations, though, that level of spending is so far from actual payroll levels that it doesn’t even enter the picture. And it isn’t as if the biggest spenders can’t afford to pay some taxes, as they have in the past.

Still, is there legitimacy to teams wanting to dip beneath the line? If so, what does that tell us? Passan says that limboing under the luxury tax for one year and then jumping back to a $246MM payroll would save the Yankees and Dodgers “only $12 million in luxury-tax penalties.” But his approach — simply comparing the hypothetical 2019 tax rate between scenarios in which these organizations do or do not end up over the luxury line in the prior year — seemingly ignores a few other factors. Since the tax rate rises with each consecutive year in which the line is passed, there’s more than one future season of payroll to consider. Plus, the new CBA includes a surcharge on exceeding the tax by more than $20MM (12%) and exceeding it by $40MM or more (a whopping 42.5% plus a loss of ten places in the first-round draft order; 45% on the second consecutive time). As ESPN.com’s Buster Olney notes on Twitter, the Dodgers and Yankees “might have a $100+ [million] incentive to get under” for one year, all things considered.

Still, the general point regarding the luxury tax seems to be correct: it isn’t the sole or even a major cause here. But it is a factor, especially as a part of several other somewhat one-off considerations that may be lining up to make this a unique offseason. Given the history of spending from the Yankees and Dodgers (to say nothing of the Giants, who are engaged in their own staredown with the CBT threshold and reportedly prefer to remain south of that $197MM mark), it could be this really is mostly a one-year dip. Taking those teams out of the top-level market-driving position, perhaps in part as they anticipate chasing younger, better free agents next winter, could have a major short-term impact without necessarily indicating that the balance of power has shifted for good against players.

How about that other factor that’s popularly mentioned and which the league itself (rather remarkably) suggested in its statement? On the one hand, it’s probably too neat an explanation to say simply that the Boras Corporation is holding things up. While Scott Boras is notoriously willing to run the clock, he doesn’t exactly make a habit of negotiating well into January and February; to the contrary, he usually isn’t forced to drag things out, as Passan notes. And he does represent a huge number of this year’s free agents, including top-tier names like Hosmer, Martinez, Arrieta, Mike Moustakas and Greg Holland in addition to second- and third-tier free agents such as Carlos Gonzalez, Carlos Gomez, Tony Watson, Matt Holliday and Jayson Werth.

While it seems hard to believe he’s single-handedly responsible, Boras is reportedly sitting on big offers for Hosmer and Martinez that seem at least to approach the bounds of expectations when the winter started. Those players are well within their rights to wait and seek more, but the figures they seemingly have in hand to this point aren’t unexpected. And the fact they haven’t taken deals yet does hint at the influence of Boras to some extent. For his part, true to form, Boras provided Passan with a cheeky analogy to express his position: “I wouldn’t blame the baker if the flour doesn’t show up.”

In mixing the free agent batter, Boras and his compatriots on the agency side do seem to be running into some unexpected interference, too. But what’s the root? Another somewhat unique circumstance that may be impacting this year’s market is that identified by Dave Cameron (formerly) of Fangraphs: with fewer than ten teams currently projected to run roughshod over the remainder of the league, there’s a lack of incentive for win-now spending from mid-level organizations. That, in turn, helps decrease the need for the top teams to maintain their edge through spending. It’s a phenomenon that is not entirely dissimilar from what we’ve seen at the non-waiver deadline, where Wild Card contenders are at times reluctant to make significant splashes knowing the endgame to be a one-game playoff.

Passan does recognize a few of these factors, but perhaps views them in a different light. He says that “33 percent of baseball teams declare themselves unwilling to spend and others still pronounce themselves unfit yet to win,” suggesting that modern baseball’s emphasis on wise spending also serves as an excuse not to try to win. He contends that the preference to trade, rather than to sign mid-level free agents, has “almost destroyed baseball’s so-called middle class of veteran non-stars.” (Counterpoints come in the form of Chatwood and Bruce, among others.) One GM told Passan: “Why would I pay a guy now when I can trade for one every bit as good in July and give up almost nothing?”

While there’s likely some structural element to all this, it’s difficult to simply reject the unique circumstances of this winter out of hand. We don’t always have an abundance of what Cameron calls “super teams” — at least, that is, not until some big-market bullies have gone out and bought up the best veterans. With so many teams entering the winter with already impressive arrays of talent, along with the other circumstances discussed above, the stage was perhaps set for a slow-down that could stand apart from any broader forces.

As we suggested back in November, if there is indeed a broader force at play that strongly explains what we’re currently seeing, perhaps it’s the ongoing youth movement that has occurred since the steroid era. The fact that more on-field value is coming from younger players suggests a reason that older, mid-level players are encountering a market that isn’t interested in promising many years. After all, as more teams are able to find equivalent production from within at a cheaper rate, future roster spots may be increasingly anticipated to be occupied by current prospects.

Many of the points Passan makes touch upon this very factor. Sources on both the league and union sides tell him that the free agent model (six years of service before the open market) is simply outdated. He spends considerable time discussing the union’s blind spot on this subject in recent CBA talks. The MLBPA focused on lifestyle changes while letting the league have a hard cap on international amateur spending, doing nothing to boost spending (some would argue the contrary) in setting luxury tax rules, and (we’d add) failing to do anything to boost significantly the earning capacity of pre- and mid-arbitration players (save for some nominal increased to the league’s minimum rate of pay).

Of course, it’s also worth emphasizing that the union went to great lengths to revamp the qualifying offer system in an effort to scale back the reluctance teams had expressed when weighing the pursuit of players who’d rejected the QO under the previous CBA. That was a significant talking point both in the media and at the negotiation table as the MLBPA sought to eliminate instances of players being “forced” to settle for short-term deals due to the burden of draft-pick compensation. Just how well that worked is not yet fully clear thanks to lack of data the slow-moving offseason has provided, though Carlos Santana and Wade Davis had no issues finding healthy contracts that beat most expectations — at least in terms of average annual value.

The union’s assumption, presumably, was that open-market spending would continue to support the size of the players’ pie slice, particularly with lesser penalization issued to teams seeking to sign players that had performed well enough to receive a QO. In turn, the MLBPA undoubtedly hoped that said slice would continue to be allocated to the best veteran players (even if their more youthful brethren will be expected to produce more value on the field in the years to come). While the offseason has clearly not played out in that fashion, current calls for wholesale changes to the arbitration system and service time requirements for free agency weren’t pushed as hot-button topics on which the MLBPA needed to focus — at least not to the extent that changes to the QO system were underscored as a critical need.

While the general situation could set the stage for a labor conflict over the coming years if these trends continue, as Passan suggests, there’s probably also room for developments to push back in the other direction. The union might press back before it reaches the point of labor unrest. Some of the unique circumstances on this year’s market may ameliorate the situation. Of greatest interest, perhaps, is the possibility that the inefficiencies created by aging curve trends will begin to resolve. The market has already shown some means of adaptation, as with the advent and increasingly frequent use of opt-out clauses. Some very youthful free agents are expected to hit the open market in the seasons to come, with age still well on their side in no small part because they were promoted early and were able to resist extensions by locking up plenty of money through arbitration and endorsement deals. These players will still have ample opportunity to land massive contracts.

There could be a trickle-down effect for extension scenarios, too. If teams forgo mid-level free agents, they’ll be giving more time and opportunity to younger players, who’ll in turn reach arbitration eligibility and free agency sooner. Teams will continue to search for extension bargains, as ever, but there’s no particular reason at this point to think that’ll be a problem so much as a further opportunity. Passan says in a somewhat accusatory manner that “every team tries to sweet-talk its young players into under-market long-term contracts that delay their free agency, leading to a paucity of 26- and 27-year-olds in free agency.” That’s a hardly a new trend, of course, as John Hart-led Indians largely pioneered that practice roughly a quarter century ago.

Other top stars have, to date, resisted the urge to take money in exchange for giving up their rights to the open market. If players like Carlos Correa, Francisco Lindor, Kris Bryant and Mookie Betts won’t rush into extensions, then they’ll hit the market at young ages with huge earning potential — as, of course, Bryce Harper and Manny Machado will next winter. If those players continue on year-to-year paths, teams hoping to find value through extensions may need to promise more money and years than they’d prefer to mid-level players, which ought to be beneficial to players in such uncertain situations.

Furthermore, younger stars that do ultimately accept long-term extension offers could very well see those markets move forward if teams do indeed begin to cut back on investments in aging free agents; Lindor reportedly received and rejected a nine-figure extension offer last winter. That would’ve crushed Andrelton Simmons’ $58MM pre-arbitration record for a player between one and two years of service time.

Turning back to the immediate market, though, it does still seem possible that some of this winter’s free agents will be caught in the middle of these broader forces. But it should not yet be assumed that there’ll be a far-reaching spending drop in the form of a permanently changed free-agent market (even if this year’s overall market falls well shy of reasonable expectations). The market for baseball players is highly susceptible to change from nuanced, often uncertain variables. We ought to see how they all play out before passing final judgment.